tv Newsmakers CSPAN July 15, 2012 6:00pm-6:30pm EDT
>> coming up on c-span, "newsmakers" with kevin brady. later, "q &a" followedthen, pr's with the british house of commons. >> joining us on newsmaker, congressman kevin brady, the vice chair of the economic committee. we talk about taxe ands. richard rubin has the first question. >> president obama made his case for extending the tax cuts scheduled to expire at the end of the year. republicans agree we should extend the tax cuts for 98% of people. you want 100. let's do what we agree on and fight about what we disagree on
later. what is wrong with that approach? >> it creates far more uncertainty for the economy. we have a struggling economy. here we are three years after recession, and we have the worst recovered, 10-10 since world war ii. this will create more uncertainty. secondly, it does the solve the problem. i guess that is the key point. it will not be good for the economy to fight over this. secondly, it is not serious about deficit reduction. but the spending levels we can double everywhere these taxes. so i really think we ought to agree on extending these cuts or at least stopping the tax increases and making a serious commitment, a guaranteed upper
down vote on a fundamental task of reform next year so we can discuss not only how we have a or corporate tax code, how do we sustain our entitlements. how do we get health care costs under control? >> how does it reduce uncertainty? >> they will be punished. it is those that are most likely to contribute to growth. we may be able to find one that thinks it is good for the economy. >> how do you go home and talk to people in how does the economy were? -- how does the economy work? they are sitting down and the table. they say we have to give a tax break to those in houston because of potentially they may hire a secretarial assistance.
the democrats want to give them pell grants. how do you convince those people there? i'm only talking about the top to%. >> we have a regulatory environment. one of three states have made back all the jobs. why doesn't washington do the same thing? why is it not balance the regulations more decks for us and an economy that is growing -- >> do you support the governor's decision?
>> they clearly are very concerned about $24 billion of extra cost. it really has an eye toward the bottom line. >> how would they feel of the money is going to arkansas or louisiana and not your state? >> there has been an evolution. they provided a teaser rate on all of these dollars. it eventually goes away. they're not so easily attracted to that initial funding. they normally pick up the bill. >> do you support governor perry's decision? >> i support the state making their decision. i think it was a mistake the way obamacare was designed. for states to look at those
mandates and this opportunities, i think he's making a good decision. >> you are turning down this. he said that is the price of freedom. >> i believe that obamacare will make it tougher. we struggled to cover. we have a very poor population. we have those who are there illegally. it is a challenge. overall the health-care law is going to make it tougher. >> the house voted to repeal the laws but he did in january 2011. republicans talk about repealing. where is the second half?
bill're looking to the that was produced by ways and means but was never given a vote by the speaker. there were certified to lower health-care premiums by about 10%. they took a step-by-step approach and focus on how we lower the cost of health care with allowing small businesses to get the discounts of big boys get. they're able to shop across state lines. it did allow with younger people to stay on their parents plant longer. it did deal with pre-existing illnesses. i think we ought to affect a worker backpack. a person can choose a health
care plan anywhere in america that is tailored to their needs. they can take them from state to state at home. when they're starting small businesses, one that they have a tie to. it creates a new ideas for a society that does not stay in the same job. i think we can lower the cost of care and improve the quality. >> the individual that had the framework is going to be your party's nominee. does that take away an issue for you? many democrats will say you lead the way. >> i do not think so. people understand that governor romney was acting in massachusetts, designing a solution for massachusetts. he does not think that is the right solution for the rest of the country. i believe not only are we going to see the health care plan
reversed, we're good to have a serious discussion about real affordable health care discussion. >> so much of what you said is the republican platform is an obamacare purity take away the mandate and there is an awful lot that you and president obama could agree on. why are you so insistent on 34 votes or what ever it was about repealing this? >> we had two votes, one as a law and one by the supreme court. we did have a number to fund certain parts. you are correct. >> we do not have 21 significant tax increases. we do not see the government run exchanges, the cut on medicare. we do not see those provisions as being interval to health- care costs.
we do think there needs to be serious discussion to enforce this law. we ought to be adding thousands of new nurses. i would not characterize us as having common ground on the mandate or the bureaucracy that surrounds obamacare. we think that is the wrong solution. >> we have not talked much about expanding access to insurance. one of the thing the president it was expand access to insurance of 30 million people. they pay for subsidies in the form of refundable tax credits. how important is it is that goal of increasing the number
of people that are insured and what republicans do about it? >> it is not just offering them health care insurance but offering them health care coverage. half of all the new enrollees is medicaid. it is finding a doctor who would see someone on medicaid. we think the coverage was by government paying the extra cost of health care rather than a series that will lower costs. i come from and local chamber of compass perspective. -- chamber of commerce perspective. it is the cost. i think he failed to address the key elements expect why we have money will try to pay down the costs. how do we reduce the costs? you and i do not really have the choices and health care.
we cannot take it with this for most of our lives. this is not reflected in our health care. i give the president credit for taking on health care as a reform issue. the solution is wrong. >> what about adding certainty to the tax code? david axelrod said if the president is reelected, he thinks republicans across the aisle and work on a number of issues including the tax code. do you think the republicans will work with them in a bipartisan way that we have not seen in the last 3.5 years? >> we have been here on fundamental tax reform waiting for the president to sit down at the table with us.
we have held 20 separate hearings on tax reform. we have made public the draft to come sit down with us. in a few weeks you will see a bill coming on the house not only extend the current tax levels but also outlining both our principles for a guaranteed up or down vote, forcing congress to do their job. we're going to be at the table. >> will the atmosphere be different master? -- different next year? >> how we all wake up will shape the dynamics for the end of the year this year and going forward as well. i just think the american public is hungry for us and the new president to be bold about
those solutions. >> what is the target date? >> 2013. >> i think unique time for both -- you need time for both parties to lay out their ideas. this is fairly complex. this takes some time. i think having time for the ideas in time for the discussion for law that people understand is going to take that time. >> the thinking right now is to put together some sort of bill that everyone can agree on to put decisions off our put enough time for you to get down.
do you still have a debt extension? how does this all fits together it? >> i think it is a mistake to leave all those issues to the lame duck. i think that is why the house will be the bill to stop those tax increases. that is why we are going to do it. just looking to the debt ceiling, i have not seen a white house and nimble enough to come up with those solutions. >> among the toughest decisions you will have is how you broaden the tax base. they talked that we will lower the rate and there is a hole in the plan.
what tax rates would get shrunken or not eliminated? >> at the end of the day you get it down. you want to do the same for families and individuals. 25% and 15% levels. we cannot continue all the tax expenditures. not all of them will go. not all of them can stay. in the past congress has not dealt with it. i think the time is up. to do if you will need your partners. i am convinced it can be done next year. >> that made it sound like it cannot be done. >> my initial thought was no new news here.
you have to reduce the current tax expenditures. it is probably in the ballpark. >> that report included reducing interest on mortgages. >>i think the whole list of tax expenditures is a bit stunning when you look at it. a lot has been created around tax goes that is not low or fair. if you focus on the real pro- growth tax code the number of the expenditures are not needed. that is why we have a process. >> how do you explain things like the earned income tax credit and those targeted of those on the lower end of the scale? >> they have to fit into a pro- growth tax discussion. we often look at how
progressive it is. i think the greatest in the quality is between an american that does have a job and one that does not. if we treat the right tax code, we will put a lot more people to work. >> will the goal be just to do that? >> i think if we do is right we will generates more revenue. i do not think we put the energy workers back to work on shore as we should. i think we leave $80 billion on the table and those jobs. i think there is a way to grow the economy and generate new revenues. republicans are very open to the idea of new revenues.
>> you said something about big problems. cells of security, medicare, the deficit, taxes. -- social security. we have seen the numbers. how big are the problems? >> no. they are massive. two weeks ago assisting in a small room we heard from the trustees of social security. essentially what they said was social security has never been in bad shape as it is currently. time is running out. this is actually the easiest of the entitlements. medicare will be a challenge. i think there's a good path forward with bipartisan support. on the business environment we
are missing a huge opportunity. we know what is happening in europe. the growth is slowing in china. with the right business environment and economy, we could be a magnet for investment and growth. regulations moved past the pale. these costs are a drag. >> you still can back to the floor this year and talked about tax cuts in which only 3% of those people are going to be creating jobs. you are going to be given a whole lot of money away to people who do not need it. it is fun to have money. it is fun to be rich. as far as turning this economy
around and doing things like medicare and social security, instead decided what you need to do is get more money to millionaires and billionaires. >> i wish people would read the rest of the sentence. they do say 3.5% @ taxpayers will be hit. that is almost a million small businesses in america. you are actually hitting the job creature's along main street to you most want to encourage. if you look at those rates, some have said let's tax people that are millionaires. most of those are business owners. the number one business they are in its american manufacturing. i do not think it is a real
serious proposal. they get the economy going. they will pay down the deficit and create growth. >> we have five minutes remaining. >> they are saying that we are willing to me part of the way there. republicans have to get a little bit on revenue. is there any way other than this argument where republicans would be willing to give some revenue in exchange for this? >> tax increases that no. revenue from economic growth, yes. we think that we have a serious spending problem. they will start paying down national debt. the common ground is stronger economy free-spending disciplines. better economic policies,
balance regulations. >> you are an expert on international trade. gov. romney has run into problems trying to explain his swiss bank account. did these issues bother people? >> i do not think so. with the economy so for i would -- so poor, i would predict that on election day there will be fewer americans working than the day president obama took office. think about that. after the bailout, cash for clunkers, $5 trillion in debt, this present would have taken them backward.
>> do you think that governor romney should put more than that one year? of tax returns. >> people are not paying attention to that. they see this as politics. is my community growing? are we under water? do you have secure jobs? >> it is an issue that they understand. >> i do not agree there. i do think is key issues on debt and health care will drive 99% of voters. >> how would you gauge how congress has changed on this front? how capable is this congress or the next congress working across party lines?
>> it is better. my answer is no. it has been more partisan. what we have right now is a city -- a significantly different view of which direction they ought to go. there are solutions on that key problem. at the end of the day i think we can solve some of these problems. voters have made some real significant change the last four to six years. we're going to make the decision of what are the solutions? do they think the problem is we spend too much to? do they want to pay for its?
they are glenn to make a -- they are going to make a decision on do they want a health care all to go all the way? >> who do you blame? do you blame this president? >> as part as partisanship out -- i would say this president toeother than trade issue, i do not think he has led. i don't think he has sat down to solve the problem. >> thank you very much for joining us. we continue the conversation. but did you try to frame the discussion on post election politics, the fiscal cliff.
let me begin with you what the environment will be like post november 6. >> we have no idea what the environment will look like. i thought he clearly stated what the republican position is. no tax increases. do not give an inch on health care. >> you talked about what congress will be dealing with next year. what i thought was interesting was that this is a calendar year 2016. -- 2013. we're good to see a lot of chance kicking down the road. they will be dealing with
president romney or president obama. >> where almost at the end of the road when it comes to some of these issues. >> a do not know how they will do it. >> i cannot see a living giving -- other than giving up that statement how they would massaged their way through december 2013 if and when they finally get tax reform. >> you brought up by partisanship. will it be different next year? >> it is hard to tell. republicans won a lower spending -- want to lower and taxes. democrats want lower spending a slightly higher taxes.
they are about as far apart. there is no middle ground. >> you brought up entitlement programs. it is interesting. they will get an awful lot of pressure from advocates. washington is offering this money. >> what role will congressmen brady play in the next congress? >> he will be the no. 3 republican with me next year. >> he is a reasonable guy. some of the newbies would
insist on a huge debt reduction package. it seems like they would make a deal to pass that. he is not acting by himself. the speaker has reflected this. >> will this be on voters' minds? he seems to think they will vote on the economy. >> those messages are really geared toward swing voters. geared toward swing voters.